you. .. as free from burdensome restrictions that possible in order to gain, the revenue. >> i agree that simplicity is better with complexity and

running auctions coming to inspect them out there. the goal of the option is to maximize the overall economic opportunity from spectrum. that's what is taken into account and will start proceedings in the near future and be hearing from a lot of stakeholders and we look forward to working with the committee on the process of ensuring that we have spectrum options to maintain u.s. leadership. >> du -- may be a mistake, do you think i've managed freedom from restriction is a high priority for that goal? >> yes, i think so. spectrums are complex and there's history and design options and direction from congress the statute that will implement and maximize the opportunity of spectrum in determining constitution with all stakeholders the best

simplest model to drive the best economic growth and opportunity. that will be the focus i hope we'll all have been addressing the complex issues and option designed. >> either mr. mcdowell or the other scum is there anyone who can weigh in on this as well? >> you're absolutely right senator debbie keep these two just a bare minimal amount. just having learned from experience if they go back briefly to the 2007 when i voted on the july 2007 order for the 700 megahertz auction there were conferences on the d block in c. block. i voted for deep thought but not receive a conferences. in both cases, it did not turn out as. for instance, the intended winner did not make a winning bid and nobody bid on the d block format the minimum bid. there are all sorts of other collateral problems with it.

it was the best of intentions that we can sometimes make the super bowl berth designs, but attend the action takes place in that time networks have built out, the market has passed five back in time. that is why it is important to us after we called flexible use policies and i thank the chairman and the tax about that recently. >> thank you here there's so many who want to questions. if we don't get a second round i do have some questions for the record. thank you, mr. chairman. >> thank you, senator hutchison. senator kerry. the next thank you mr. chairman. you've regarded some of the progress made in advances in technology. the technology itself wiese e. competition and the apps and a lot of the things they had a choice on. but they really are only two

dominant wireless service providers. 96% of americans have a choice of either -- as to wired rock bands, easier cable or telephone. so my question to you is how would she say the law has in fact either encouraged or discouraged competition in the best sense of the word in terms of numbers of providers and so forth? >> well first, i hear from a broad array of speakers today that competition is a core feature of our free market system and the best mechanism to generate innovation, job creation and consumer benefit. competition is always -- has always been an issue. in the communication space.

since 1996 with more competition than they did before and that's good. we hear from many stakeholders in this space smaller companies trying to compete they have real concerns about obstacles to competition. the more that we can come in a smart sensible, pragmatic way promote healthy, robust competition, the better our economy will be and consumers will be unless they need therapy to adapt other kinds of regulations the commission would need to consider. >> but anyone can chime in on this. is that the commission said in an an interview that two and two is adequate? that is what we're willing to settle? portion of the law be geared towards trying to somehow figure out whether there's a greater number within the space this? >> i'll someone else be. a duopoly is not the ideal outcome at all. >> senator, excellent issue to

raise. 90% of american consumers have a choice of five wireless providers. i'm also a lot to commend sherman for his work here this goes back to 2002, 10 years ago. where can i mycenae suttee white spaces. there's opportunity to create new delivery platforms, which can inject more competition last mile and wireless is a terrific hope in that regard. i'm optimistic about a petition in the broad space and that certainly is a cornerstone of what i try to do at the commission. >> i see what to say something. then he threw an additional question not as we do that. for google facebook, microsoft amazon, a bunch of folks they've been able to innovate. significantly obviously, that net neutrality has been critical of barrett are doing a lot of us

would argue to their ability to be able to do so. can you just share with us -- i think it was what three -- three of the four witnesses at a recent hearing related to video sharing made the same argument. but how would you say investors and startups on the internet, how they responded to this capacity with respect to the nationality? how essential is it in your judgment and creation of new entities click >> it has been essential. the issue is that google and facebook and amazon have today. but the versions of those companies, three, five seven nine years ago when no one heard of them and they were wonderful new, entrepreneurial

opportunities that existed because of an open internet. the framework we adopted last year, supported both by early-stage investors, technology companies, the cable industry's prophetic certainty and predictability across the board to investors in the early-stage technology companies as well as investors and infrastructure. in fact we have seen since been an increase in investment and innovation across the broadband economy. our economy continues to boom and we have seen double-digit increases in investment in broadband infrastructure and much more stability than before we adopted our framework. >> as we think about bringing delight to date we get to that at some point, should we codify the rule? >> i would encourage. >> any dissent on that? >> i brought a long dissent in 2010 and i think actually

codifying would complicate efforts internationally as a male combat the i.t. from trying to regulate internet governance. the issue that traveled the globe has come of many many times. it's thought the united states to do this. why can't we do it internationally? i would be wary of congress trying to codify this. it is before the courts. we'll find out what did the fcc has the authority to do it and i think the sec did not have the authority to do what it did good >> part of the reason i believe we see a lot of innovation in the space and more encouragement towards that is because these high-level rules of the rose, which incidentally are on one page provide transparency provided a means for those who want to innovate in this space, that they know that the isp their service provider will not be able to -- will not be able to favor their businesses at the

dutch are meant of innovation. so with all of these players icann, wanting an encouraging us to move forward with the high-level rules of the road, i encourage you to recognize what has been happening over the past several years in terms of the engagement and what will continue to happen with the protections in place. >> in closing, mr. chairman, with respect to what the united states does go have a profound impact on what they do. we want them to be open. so i think there is a powerful argument for why we might consider. >> thank you, senator kerry. i encourage all members so everyone can be called upon in a relatively short period of time to keep their questions and

answers to five minutes. senator demand. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i have to smile when i hear us you talk about encouraging innovation and investment in the industry. this is one industry we don't need to encourage. this is happening so much faster than we can even understand. the greatest obstacle it detects people in industry, whether they are content providers or networks is just arbitrary and unpredictable rulemaking. i mean they don't know what's going to have been. i would be curious mr. chairman. i appreciate you coming by my office and i enjoyed meeting with you. as i've said before i appreciate your service. how many complaints about the open internet worker has the sec received in the last six months since the regulations were published? >> i'm not sure if we receive formal complaints. >> how many did you receive before that?

>> in terms of formal complaints come in the commission received at least one. >> it was handled on a particular basis. this is what they mean by preemptive rulemaking. the pride in that work with private capital and we are deciding how they're going to manage it. if there was only one network we would have to sit down and talk about it. but as commissioner mick powell has talked about, whether it is wireless landline, dozens and dozens of choices. it is remarkable to me that we are talking about getting a limited ability to manage anything that we think we can manage the internet and pick winners and losers. the market has worked well and i think despite what is said here today, from what i hear the players and stakeholders in the market is that this threat of the government coming in and deciding how much they're going to charge based on bandwidth,

not only affects the networks but eventually the content providers will be told how to favor one versus another. so this is a big concern for me and commissioner mick dowell, we hear monopoly type about a lot, duopoly of law. and the wireless business. how many american consumers purchase wireless services from a provider other than at&t and verizon? >> senator, from the fcc's own statistics as well as 100 million picking a provider other than. >> i think we've got a pretty remarkable and dynamic competitive marketplace. i think there is a good and growing case for lighter and lighter hand of regulation not to go and whether it been no complaints and no problems and violate the private property rights of the people who build out a network and begin to tell them how they charge for their

product and as you know, users use different and what vendors very big difference is for us to try to regulate makes very little sense right now. a lot of our decision-making as we talked about, mr. chairman when you can buy the office is based on the assumption there is not enough competition and one of the responsibilities at the fcc is to present or develop a competition study. you and i talked about the need to get it out so we could have a good information as decision-makers here. we have a competitive market are dealt with? all the evidence is that we do and the fcc is long overdue and giving us the information we need to make good decisions and for you to make good decisions because most of the regulations in what i consider arbitrary and unpredictable rulemaking comes from the assumption there is not enough competition and choices

and it's the job of government to come and protect the consumers. it's a false assumption we need to get the report from you. thank you for your service and mr. chairman i yield back. >> thank you, senator demand. senator baggage. >> thank you all for being here and if you always know what i like to invite you, especially new members to come up to alaska to give you a sense rural and even though 90% of the country has wireless competition we are not in that equation yet. he thank you for the work you have done. mr. chairman, i'll be parochial for a moment, but that's who i represent in alaska. let me give you an example. we are dealing with an issue now. let me give you compare his thing. adak if you're in east texas and anchorage zen los angeles to

give you a distance in some of you know this already. a 1200-mile distance. one of the rules for release the efforts of the national broad band plan with no flash cut. well, here is what they deal with, 130 million folks went from a december 2011 resource at the usf funds to january 201284% reduction, just like that. this company will be out of business at the end of this year. many of you heard complaints and concerns about the waiver process. this group represents 100 dirty customers. this is waiver one that they have to sell out. this is waiver to. it is very expensive and very hard to do. somehow, you know, i recognize one size can't fit all and you have been very good to the commission in figuring out

alaska and hawaii. this is the word that we just -- i'm giving you my flashpoint. we need some ability because at the end of the year they will not be able to pay the u.s. funds and they will be out. there's the landline and wireless provider in the whole area. that's in the sense of will happen. so is there a way -- i used this as an example. small carriers under 50,000 lines and you imagine it buried under 50,000 already number to give relief and application process and the fee structure and the costs. this is several hundred thousand dollars. many fewer lawyers and past players and these are not cheap when you say in a few pieces of paper drawn up. is there some way to give some relief in this process but also a very timely response because the clock is ticking and they'll

be out of business very quickly. mr. chairman, i give it to you do you guys have done an excellent job in working with us in alaska because it is so different. when we say rural, it is rural. extreme rural. a lot of you have been there and i see what i'm talking about. help us walk through the cynosure plays a adak can survive for most of the work is now an wireless. this is what they want to provide. they meet the goal of broadband. this is my example. >> the general challenge we face as we inherited a program with very little accountability, the recipients in general house control of the funding and fiscal responsibility is a challenge in converting program from one with insufficient ability to run with the consumers pay and every dollar is going out and away that make

sense as a challenge. when the first run of implementation but we understand for some companies it's a particular challenge. we take the waiver process seriously and will continue to look for ways to streamline and improve it so that we can move from the program we have come whichever degree didn't work to one that efficiently achieves their collective goals of ensuring universal broadband. >> is there a way, especially for small carriers a waiver process cost is the same. is there a way to help give some relief so it's actually a streamlined process? i know you may think it is streamlined, but i'm not a lawyer so i can't tell you what it looks like from a lawyer's death. it just seems excessive for a simple obvious issue is about to happen. >> we will continue to look for the most streamlined way to run the process. as many small companies receiving consumer dollars.

we have to get the balance right between ensuring accountability, protecting money going into the fund, but also not creating a situation for companies coming in. some of what the companies are doing now in healthiness make sure we have an accountable program they won't have to do more than once. but we are committed to a streamlined process. >> will do, mr. chairman i several other questions some broader and more parochial, but i appreciate keeping to your commitment of five minutes total. >> thank you, senator baggage. senator bozeman. >> thank you, mr. chairman. we appreciate all of you being here and a special welcome to our two new members. chairman genachowski come as you know we sent your letter regarding the universal service reform and the need for regulatory certain key as the

process for businesses both large and small and he should be able to properly plan for the future and there are many concerns, especially from rural providers that they lack the necessary data and information to move forward. so i'd welcome your comments regarding that. we also invited you to send arkansas and i think in many and rural america feel like they're being left out of the process. arkansas is much like west virginia. so we would also ask you to do that. or can you comment a little bit about that as we move forward? >> sure. first of all, it would be my second trip to arkansas and i learned a lot on my first trip and recognize the challenges in rural arkansas when it comes to broadband. challenges all over the country and we have 18 million americans who live at here is no the broadband infrastructure including many americans. the program we inherited this any more money than it should to

certain areas. funding, for if i providers in a single area or finding one company when there is an unsubsidized competitor. the reforms that we put in place are designed to cut those back and then finally move forward with funding broadband friend served americans in places like arkansas. the transition is challenging but it focuses on achieving goals for rural america is the purpose of universal service in a way that's consistent with response ability accountability and predictability insurgency. so in some ways the hardest part of implementation will continue to work together as a group to get the balance right so that we get broadband to people who don't have it who deserve a comment that we don't waste money and wales are cognizant of business realities for come and he is receiving funds for the

program and deal with those companies and a fair reasonable, phased-in way. >> very good, thank you. one of the things that all of us hear a lot about our dimasi is that the lifeline program and the marketing is very, very aggressive now. many americans are concerned about dimasi is possible fraud and abuse at the lifeline program. it is like seeing the wheelchair ad on television, you know, where you contact syndicate this free. what that does also is it's really one of those things that destroys trust in our institutions. so can you comment on reforms? i know you're actively working to do that. what do we need to do to fix the program? >> a few months ago the commission unanimously adopted some strong reforms to address waste, fraud and abuse in the

program, tackling duplicative recipients when there's only supposed to be one per home tackling situations when people aren't entitled to get the benefit get the benefit. there is a problem with sleazy unscrupulous people to take advantage of the program and of people. we are increasing a person efforts and i cannot speak about specific investigations we have ongoing, the companies taking advantage of the program we will come after. >> is good to know. we talked about specter of a little bit. what short-term solutions are out there for spec or need that can be utilized while we take a longer-term solutions, such as incentive options and things like that are implemented. what is on the short-term? >> several things in some of my colleagues may want to comment. i agree with commissioner mick dowell. we are seeing wi-fi taking more and more of the load that is

unlicensed that transit commission issued not knowing where it would lead a couple decades ago. we see advances in to knowledge and infrastructure, smaller cells, more efficient network. there is near-term spectra that we can option off if we all work together. we are working closely with ntia the 1755 spectrum we need to accelerate those and move quickly. there are several pieces of spectrum identified in the legislation with deadlines for auctioning them. we are working hard to make sure we option them, we do in a way most valuable to the public here for example, find ways to pay spectrum otherwise put out. >> thank you, mr. chairman. >> senator blunt. >> on the reform of the universal service fee chairman, what are you doing there to deal

with the issue of subsidy of an unsubsidized competitor or in that environment we type about before? how are you defining unserved and underserved in trying to be fair as you look at the unserved community and then let that the partially serve community? symbion that would be helpful. >> well, getting broadband to underserved americans of school number one along with fiscal responsibility and tackling those areas where the fund is supporting one country with an unsubsidized competitor. we agree that needs to be phased out. these issues that becomes challenging. what if there's overlapping issues that will work through us to implement but broadband to underserved americans fiscal responsibility and cognizance of business realities so that we

don't treat unfairly companies they should be receiving money olds in the late but have near-term alliances into account. >> the additional use of this kind have any impact on new orleans small telephone companies that are 60 or so% maybe even might be 90% are dependent on the help from the uss? as he then say, spend more on broad in. i mean you have less available to spin on traditional phone service or how does that impact quiet >> now, the networks are the same and many of the companies in this particular category -- many of the issues come from a subset of rural providers and that is the one that are under what is called a rate of return regime. companies have received for many

years the guaranteed 11.25% return. most companies don't operate that way. most unserved rural americans served by companies cutprice cat carriers. we do want to make sure as we put in place reforms that we are sent into the unique needs of the smallest come needs under rate of return, but also have an obligation to consumers putting money into the fund in getting the balance right is what we're focused on together. it is not easy, but that is our goal and focus. >> on the spectrum sale, do you have any luck with companies? do you need some companies to relinquish areas that the spec and they have and are you having any luck getting them to do that? >> with respect, i agree with my colleague, winning the federal government to relinquish spectrum they have or to move more quickly to share spectrum. that is the single most promising area to free up a

substantial amount for mobile broadband along with defensive option provisions the committee in congress adopt. >> do you have ideas on how that might work or have the government community could give a total control of prices that gun in a way that would be hugely beneficial release beneficial to the use of spectrum? >> first of all the federal government alone occupy 60% of the usable spectrum of the federal government, so that tells you elaborate there. spectrum sharing is an ill-defined term that can mean a lot of different things. one question i have is that a private sector user to spectrum is going to not have per your deeds, should the government want to break into his channel so to speak, for instance if the private sector users use device and all of a sudden the car was struck because the government beastie is that what to the

marketplace? probably minimal. it's the right thing unless cc we don't have priorities in it if your walkie-talkie or baby monitor from childhood, et cetera. got caught us by the stronger person or your neighbor. that is not an ideal situation if that's what you mean by spectrum sharing. the unlicensed uses a form of sharing, using scraps in between channels. there's a lot of different ways we could approach the sharing concept, but i don't think it's a cure-all. the executive branch needs to look harder what kind of spectrum they can relinquish any need to do do it yesterday. >> thank you chairman. >> thank you, senator blunt. >> thank you, mr. chairman. chairman genachowski today we look at today's "new york times"

talks about the hacking case and that of the rupert murdoch for addiction newspaper was formally charged on tuesday and for others reverting the course of justice in the phone hakeem situation going on. and i am looking to that because it holsters the case that i want to make with you. there is evidence the news corporations have been involved in a broad range of misconduct reaching the highest levels of the new york-based company and involving actions in the u.k. and the u.s. now, we look at the list here and we see these are senior people from the company from the new scorer.

and they applied for renewal of the license in 2007. five years ago. and despite this long list, the fcc has not announced any plans for a good investigation into whether or not new -- new scorer has fit and i trespass to each one of you. what does it take for the fcc to begin an investigation? >> obviously, we have important responsibilities under the law and are aware of the issues we see in the u.k. these may come before the sec as an adjudicatory matter that would be appropriate for us to prejudge them and also inappropriate to speak about any investigations. >> i'm not taken that outcome. were talking about an action that has to be taken. >> we don't comment as other

agencies don't comment on investigations. we have important responsibility that we will take seriously. it's important we not prejudge it. >> that would be very good. the head of the company found unfit to major international come to a british parliamentary committees. doesn't that suggest that maybe we ought to be looking at them to see what effect that has? they do have an obligation for good care of her two of the license renewal here it. it has been a long time. it is my understanding the sec is looking into the new scorer deliberately miss led the sec regarding its application to renew the license of wwor new jersey. mr. make doll -- mr. mcdowell do you have a review? >> the chairman has stated it quite eloquently. >> i heard it. >> very good. i agree with what the chairman

said. >> senator, we do have a process in place of a potential petitioner that has a right to file before us and when and if they do, we take all of this matter seriously and will review in a timely manner. >> mrs. rosenworcel. >> the technical qualifications for licensees of the commission should monitor the situation. >> senator come with the risk of going last day of nothing official to say but it will associate themselves with college on the question can commit in the concept of renewal presenile state the record carefully and support appropriate action. >> i think that some action here is absolutely required and we have to get going on this. new jersey, where one of the stations exist would be the

fourth-largest media market in the country and hear these people have always been in the fiddling around with this and i think what we are not -- there's not enough evidence for us to me a decision, certainly we have to be looking not as insane while, then it for you to step up and declare yourself or take that license and say the patience of the country has been as long run out every point toward the license to a deserving party. many americans aren't able to get broadband service because they live in areas where companies won't make it available for simply can't afford it. yet 19 states currently restrict broadband. how do we extend that ban access

and states are passing laws to prevent municipal broadband? >> we have seen some terrific examples of municipal innovation around brought dan. my own view is that those should be encouraged. i look forward to working with the committee and addressing obstacles and barriers. >> said thank you. i hate to do this, but we really have a number of people. >> thanks, mr. chairman. >> senator rubio. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i will be brief about the two questions for the first is commissioner kelley wrote a piece in february that of the u.n. threat to internet freedom. you were talking then about the international telecommunication union. can you just give us a brief update? and if the u.s. to where we to where we stand on that issue in what will the commission will play in that regard?

>> commission plays a supporting role as a technical advisor to the state department. i understand are both private and public information that the state department will be announcing ahead of the u.s. delegation head negotiator next month sometime. this comes at a crucial time is very crucial meetings will take place internationally later in june leading towards treating negotiation and by this december. it's really about most importance that the united states cultivate alleys throughout the world and especially the developing world which could be devastated by international regulation of governance. >> at the commission or anticipate putting out recommendations to the state department as to what her position should be and what we should advocate for and against in terms of having an agenda for the summit? >> thus far i have been very encouraged by the administration statements on this issue. there's a blog posting a couple

weeks ago by the white house and state department and commerce department jointly. that's a very good sign. as far as i know the sec is on board here to >> we talk about access to different places and different senators have raised bed. i want to raise that, but i don't comment. the first amendment has to do with puerto rico and statistics about puerto rico. the 2010 section report found that 4 million puerto ricans had no broadband access, which is one sixth of all americans identified as censored. the 2011th study found 70% of puerto rico is still inserted by the broadband services. my understanding is a national broadband plan does not factor in puerto rico because it's not part of the united states. it explicitly excludes the broadband availability based on insufficient data. where do we stand on this issue? he might be alliterative doneness. >> it's an important issue.

puerto rico is very much part of our plans and we have our goal of reaching unserved americans that brought and your puerto rico is very much a part of that. the funds have to come from somewhere, which is why the more support we can get from the committee in a bipartisan basis to bring savings we can get unserved americans, the stronger will be in the faster will be able to move. gooden is in puerto rico and mobile con activity has increased very rapidly, also supported by government programs. but you're right. there is an issue with people in puerto rico and served by broadband and look forward to working with you on addressing with that. >> to affirm that, i look at it in terms of process, especially from a mobile did. we made a commitment to work within a certain budgetary framework and of course that means the types of engagement or restrictions that we speak out

today. we take a lot of meetings from those who cared and represent those in that particular -- person within that territory and care a lot about comics david d., friends on the island to desert the same type of engagement as we have. so hopefully again saving that had time to speak more about will be able to again cannot does in that area. >> is the mobile capacity expansion not part at the national level, or if it evidence that is where the demand is going because the broadband. you talked about the rapid growth in mobile comic dvd. is that based on demand? it's going faster than the national average on growth.

>> there's no question the rate of increase in puerto rico has been fast. i don't remember the love of cool penetration or two other states, but we can get information to you. >> i think it is really important and a lot of people are not aware, but the implications that can house the 21st century, especially with countries that are really engaging in this regard. china and russia to say the least, especially they're not exact to the nastiness of internet freedom and in a place that ban certain terms from search should not be a leader in international internet regulatory framework. so i hope will continue to stay engaged. i know you are well and i hope the committee will keep a close eye. >> is very serious issues and proposals out there to create a new layer of international governance for the internet are a bad idea bad for the global economy and bad for freedom and democracy around the world. across the administration were committed to opposing the

strongly. >> thank you for your resolution >> thank you, senator rubio. i'm going to con a to me. senator klobuchar was in line before that, so it will be senator to me, senator klobuchar . >> thank you, mr. chairman. i'd like to thank all the commissioners as well for being here today. i guess the first question might as well go to the chairman for this. the authority that the commission claims for the passage of the open internet ordered his arrest on title ii of telecommunications act at all, right? if the court strikes down the validity of this order, do you support reclassifying broad bands at the telecommunication

service act under title ii? >> framework we've adopted is working. it's widely supported in my two predictability insert seen the industry. i hope the court does it strike you down. i hope congress will fill the gap immediately and make sure we have the authority. this is a case for through a lot of hard work we were able to take a big radioactive dispute can't increase certainty and predictability and create a climate for increased innovation investment. >> i know that's your view. you know that's not universally or to say the least and neither of us knows that the courts going to do, but they're certainly existing possibility they could strike us down. so my question for you is do you believe -- do you intend, would you support reclassifying broad and to have it considered under title ii? >> i'm on the record as saying

the title ii approach is not the best idea. i believe we have title i authority in section 706 and i'm optimistic corvo posts that we can move forward in the direction where a eared >> commissioner mcdowell, to have an opinion? >> the title ii dr dos to be close. the implications of having it open internationally are devastating. >> does anyone else want to comment on this question? >> by mena mentioned earlier that the current framework is working, that they're a high-level rules of the road that lends to certainty and transparency that is beneficial to the american way of life in way of communicating and i am hopeful also that the courts are recognizing. >> i understand. i had a different question. it was about the applicability of title ii. >> again i'm hopeful and accord is hands down a decision that's contrary to that. i'll come back and we'll have

another. >> anybody else have anything they want to add? >> senator, during a previous hearing i would not support reclassification under title ii assuming the corvo suggested. >> i hate knowledge for the last decade the commission has been in the business of reclassifying services as information services and there's been substantial reliance on the machine and addition the supreme court has upheld the regime. at the same time i support the approach they have recommended. >> one quick thing senator. the fcc has never know what to under wine the telecommunication service under title ii. that is a myth and i'm happy to supply this committee with several country information that regard your >> i would welcome that. >> lineages ask about the

incentive options and i apologize if i missed the answer to this question earlier. but do you have a date by which you expect to finish the design process? >> we don't. we have a date -- a goal for starting the process, which is by the fall launch in the rulemaking. we intend to move as expeditiously as possible. we want to get the timing right so we maximize participation by broadcasters and have a successful option. >> okay. >> can you share with us any sort of guiding principles on what kinds of conditions he may consider attaching to the auction process? >> i can't because my mind is open and i expect we'll have a robust process hearing from stakeholders and consulting with the committee. the goal is maximizing the opportunity to our economy and all americans have learned from experience and maintaining the u.s. leadership in mobile.

>> commissioner mcdowell, do you have anything you'd like to add? >> above provisions are important. they should be investing in building out and using that spectrum. beyond that, we need to be very careful about any other conditions. >> anybody else like to add anything? >> thank you. thank you, mr. chairman. >> rejiggering here i will call upon senator klobuchar and then senators to who was here earlier and then senator pryor and then senator cantwell senator udall and senator ayotte. >> already. thank you very much, commissioner. welcome to our two new commissioners. i want to applaud you for a reason action. that is something that had a lot of issues within our state and i wondered if you could just elaborate a little

mr. chairman, navy commissioner mick dowell on how you're going to investigate this and what your plans are and why you think is the problem. >> well, work with them for the excellent work the staff committee did in tackling to cram in the hearing the committee held and the complaints we also received at the fcc about cramming and wireline. we found same as the committee staff report with respect to wireline there is real evidence that consumer reviews that we needed to act and we did unanimously at the commission, putting in place a set of reform that we expect will decrease cramming. we also continue to take enforcement seriously. we announced over the last three series of enforcement action by finds. that will continue and we will continue to look at this base. we have heard some reports of issues and the wireless space at the point where we announced her

order. i said if those problems increase, we will at so let's avoid them up front. >> thank you. commissioner mcdowell. >> adult think i can improve upon the answer. >> that's good timing. why do it twice when you can just answer once. >> this is something i've been working on a senator warner. we've introduced a bill noticed it once to install abroad land as part of any federally funded transportation project and this is part of a national brought and planned. could you just address how you're going to work with the secretary of transportation in carrying out this program? >> welcome when he cursed the transportation department and others to move as quickly as possible because it is a no-brainer. since the idea was first conceived, it is clear it's not only a wireline broadband opportunity, but a wireless one as well. many people do not realize that a wireless call, most of it is

distance traveled through wireline networks. lowering the cost of infrastructure buildout of fiber in the rose will help not only wireline but wireless and we are hopeful that we will see some action can't greatly in the near future. >> very good. mr. chairman, senate appropriations hearing said the sec had been working closely with u.s. to ensure u.s. performed is not undermine the u.s. asset portfolio. can you share the details of how those discussions are going and are you going to work to make sure that there is not any harm to the portfolio? >> we recognize these issues for sun u.s. suffers when it comes to our u.s. in resolving will require flexibility on the sec's part, flexibility on the u.s. prior, potentially on congress as part. we don't want elected tail wag the dog and have our u.s. loans

mean that consumers are paying for unjustifiable services for a long time. on the other hand we recognize business realities and will work with u.s. senate committee to address these issues. >> very good. then i had a question about the first phase of the connect america fund and the usf reform order. it's supposed to provide $300 million in support for 2012 broadband investments to unserved census blocks on the map. i hear now some portions may go unused. what is going to happen to this money. >> by understanding is that the response has been strong, but i would get back to you on how much will be utilized. obviously what you encourage the maximum use. i just that with one company to told me they would use every penny, both in the first phase and second phase and we have mechanisms to address unclaimed

money, but i think we're hearing a positive response fund companies spending it with the accountability mechanisms we've attached to it. >> last and you can answer this in writing because i know my colleagues want to get to this. we have some remote areas of our state to the point where actually one part of our state you cannot get to accept going through canada called the northwest angle unless the i.c.e. freezes over. and so, this is lake of the woods county. they fight for reallocation after the transition but had to wait years to get approval from the canadian government and we can talk about it in writing the coordination with canada going forward with regard to the incentive option legislation that was passed in february is another issues that we think we could do a better job working with our canadian friends. >> will respond in writing. >> thank you very much. >> now senator and then i would

say we have six people to go. there's a the a possibility you may slip the people who put it to us question should be respected so people could exercise discipline. >> thank you, mr. chairman. mr. genachowski, and april. this year, senator begich and i along with 17 other senators and the u.s. has supported the implications and reforms in reductions adopted the usf reform order can be properly evaluated and understood. as of yet there has not been an official reply to the letter. my question is, will there be a reply forthcoming? >> there will be reply coming in later future. >> may be addressed in the letter, because you answer the question of whether you would delay reductions in usf and icc report pursuant to the return of us into the occasions adopted

moscow's usf order can be properly evaluated and understood? >> it's important we continue to move forward while listening carefully to issues that come up and make appropriate modifications. one of the reasons they have not responded to your letter yet the state made modifications in the last two or three weeks i wanted to put in place we could tell you in the letter because we want to respond to the concerns. stopping reforms to be dead and consistent with fiscal responsibility and unfair to unserved americans would benefit to us moving forward including south dakota. >> this question has to do with the concern on the wireless and telecom industry about the need for additional spectrum. as you know great consumer demand for wireless services in the cost of recent economic reports that include unleashing the 300 megahertz of spectrum for mobile broadband by 2016

whispery $75 billion in new capital spending increase somewhere between 200,373,000 jobs and add to gdp. when you look at the entire wireless ecosystem and economic sister ride from this investment, i think it's no wonder this is better with a few good news stories that we've had in the u.s. economy. and i guess my question has to do with the issue, how we get you spectrum out there. i believe they've got to do more to identify new spectrum and get into the hands of those who invest and continue to build robust wireless networks. i know you are looking at some ways to get more spectrum to market, but i'm concerned the process may take too long and say that in some cases we need part-time and i don't think that's going to be sufficient haste upon the demand. the question is consistent with what the president called for the form of an additional 500 megahertz spectrum. can you provide more detail in how we get spectrum to market

quickly and avoid pitfalls of kicking the can down the road? >> agree with your points are thank you for the authority was to make a difference in the ford implemented quickly. recovering spectrum from government is important and work on a bipartisan basis will help and then tears areas where we've identified whereby removing regulatory barriers to spectrum is we can free up spectrum that is already commercial for terrestrial mobile broadband untouched which working with you in a bipartisan basis as well. >> would welcome the opportunity. i think it's really important. >> i just beg of you. the votes are meant to be starting right now. they haven't. we have four people waiting to ask questions. will you yield? >> i guess i will yield, mr. chairman if that's your desire. go ahead. i'll submit questions for the record. >> okay. i appreciate it.

you do have that. >> senator pryor. >> thank you, mr. chairman. chairman julius genachowski, basically distracted sec and other vans blocking technology. can you give us a quick update on the status of what the sec is doing? >> first of all, is a tremendous accomplishment for congress to pass the bill by ensuring the industry takes disability into account early demo solve a lot of problems to serve people with disabilities. the statute gives us a list of target dates to head. we've had all of them so far working well with the disabilities community and industry. we hope to continue seeing a success. >> and the child viewing act

the one about the -- >> my apology. >> those are both present morsel initiatives here in the committee, but go ahead. >> will apply that to a different question. the opportunities that technology to empower parents in meaningful ways to send to you and i have talked about for a long time. chairman rockefeller and i've talked about it. we see more and more new technologies hit the market to do that and continue to work together to incentivize technologies about those is important. >> is the sec taken steps to try to bring those technologies to bear to allow parents especially parents to utilize technologies? >> we've been doing outreach, then fiscal within the u.s. we work the education department. to the extent that we can resolve these issues through better technology in the hands of more parents that would be

preferable and will work better than other courses of action. >> mr. powell, did you have anything to add to that? >> you did a great job. he is on a roll. >> thank you. you mentioned 21st century communication video at sounds like the commission is maybe halfway through our even more than trying to implement to make that work? >> i think that's about right. were hitting our targets will continue. >> there's a provision in the clearinghouse that one of the commissioners here worked on and basically has the commission taken steps to get the clearinghouse established a? >> at our member. commissioner rosenworcel? >> i believe is underway, but certainly will make sure that continues. >> thank you, mr. chairman. a yield back my time, but i do have other questions. >> i understand.

>> thank you, mr. chaiunderstand. >> thank you, mr. chairman. german genachowski co. we spoke last week about several issues enforcing action on the dedicatory order on call completion to make sure that his being taken seriously about traffic and how you get the inclusion of carrier identification codes so you can close the loophole and find a solution there. talked about low power that will make in an implementation from the local community radio act. so i'm optimistic we will be seen low power fm stations in the near future for by the end of the year it should say. we spent a lot of time talking about the media ownership rules and specifically the media crossownership. and so i have expressed my disappointment at where the commissioners and the proposed rules particularly when it's released in september seems to be to have and congress is gone and where is congress' ability to base their objections on

this? ..

i would encourage you to come to seattle. i would also encourage you to pay attention to members of the congress they passed a disapproval of the thing you are issuing. thank you, mr. chairman. >> thank you, senator. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i will try to be brief with the votes. one of the things i would point out is 55% of the federal government, we have a bipartisan bill. senator, we are trying to do a spectrum inventory. we are not linked to know how we can reallocate our federal partners must we have that full inventory. unfortunately, we have had some parts pullback on that. i think it is essential to us. at this point talking about the

inventory build, it is an important step to move forward. i have been concerned with the approach on spectrum sharing as opposed to a location. i understand you are working on something that was pretty innovating and turns with the private sector. would you like to comment on that? >> two things. spectrum sharing is an important opportunity. it should not be thought of as eliminating a need for reallocation of government spectrum. that is just not in official use by government. in some cases, it might be -- particular areas around the country where there is a use were it is very expensive to move t-mobile with the support of the wireless industry has filed an application for an experimental license to conduct some tests around a military base. we are looking to get that

granted quickly to test this out so we can free up the section great quickly. >> i would encourage you to move forward on that i really support the efforts you have done. clearly there is going to be -- i was curious what your answer, that none of the fixed-rate returned players will be decreased. i am not sure how that happens on a going forward basis until we reach a new formula. we really appreciate the fact that you are while working together. we know you won't try to delay that.

>> thank you senator could senator inhofe? >> senator, we talked about a lot of the broadband tonight. 1750 in 1780 which you commented on tonight. my question is as we go forward to repurpose that spectrum, how is the pentagon being included in this to protect our national security interests, and how can we ensure that it is an open and transparent process so that all stakeholders can weigh in so that we handle that spectrum properly? >> the nci in the comments departments department represents all the agencies within the department. we also speak with a military agencies. of course, it is important that anything that protects the needs of the military -- but is all of our interests to a move forward to free up spectrum.

>> has the pentagon expressing concern about how you are moving or word? >> my understanding is that there is real interest in this idea of sharing mechanism for that band. also preserving the military's ability to use that spectrum in the limited areas where it needs it. >> quickly, i want to jump in on the universal service fund. as you know, it is the usf fund. certainly we all have our different viewpoints on it. new hampshire in the last data that was out in 2009 in they are a donor state. i commend you on the reform and i do think it is important that you are slowing the growth of the money that is being held in the fun fund. i think that the more that we can get the money out, the more important it is. how i continue to assure my

constituents with reforms that are being made as a donor state, that that is going to be addressed in a better way for the return on investment for my constituents? >> we look forward to working with you but our joint goal is to make sure that unserved americans everywhere am including new hampshire did the benefits of the money that goes into this fund. if you are in unserved american, our commitment is in the years ahead, this money will be used efficiently to provide service to you. >> really quickly, you only have data from 2009 i each day. we have been trying to get data from you for 2010 and 2011 and each state-by-state breakdown. i hope you can do that too as soon to we can see what each state is contributing. >> thank you senator. the vote is in process. senator wicker you are free to

ask a question, but you will be chairing the hearing. >> thank you, and shall i adjourn? >> let me ask of you will be willing to answer questions that we didn't get the chance to ask him the second round. >> i appreciate you accommodating me. we will report the bill in your absence to the fullest, mr. chairman. chairman genachowski, thank you for sticking around. we all have verse ungentle schedules this afternoon and i'm sorry i haven't been here this afternoon. along with competitive wireless carriers from operating in the united states let me commend you for moving to another

proposal we are making addressing the prospect of interoperability in the lower 700 megahertz band. if you could, tell us what is the status of this notice, and when do you expect the fcc to take final action on the issue? >> we are taking it seriously and we appreciate your urging in this regard. this is a real interference issue. we are now working with stakeholders to analyze the issues to determine if there is a way to address them to make sure that all the carriers who have spectrum in that band have the ability to use it and to get the devices for consumers. >> how is that process going? what i am trying to get is the timeline. >> if i could respond in writing to that -- i don't remember

whether the comment preceding is open or not. but our intention is to move quickly because it is a real issue in the marketplace for the characters unsent carriers. >> if you could take that for the record and give me a specific answer, when you have time to do so in writing, that would be great. let me ask commissioner mcdowell about the universal service fund and relief mechanisms. the last time the committee addressed this issue the fcc needed to focus on broadband availability while reining in costs for the remaining responses to the unique needs of rural america. which most of my state is comprised of. not at all of my colleagues agree with the aspect of the

order, particularly funding dedicated to service. however, i believe the commission took an important and necessary first step. i urge the fcc to move forward on reform, focus on the contribution to ensure that we complete modernization of usf. however, i do understand that some companies will have growing pains during this transition. it is my understanding that part of the u.s. at the order includes several relief mechanisms for those who believe that reform will have an adverse affect an adverse impact on their businesses. are you in a position today to elaborate on those relief mechanisms, mr. mcdowell? >> i believe you are speaking about the waiver process at the fcc. we had an interesting dialogue earlier regarding them. we are taking this very seriously. we want to make sure that the

waiver applications are as detailed as possible so we truly understand what the hardships may or may not be for the applicants. we also want to keep it as streamlined as possible. this is a work in process. and we hope to be able to refine the process going forward and learn a lot as we go. >> the process is proceeding? >> i think it is so far and we will make determinations as quickly as possible on those waiver applications. >> thank you very much and i appreciate folks sticking around. i look to the council to see if there is some magic words i need to say. do i need to adjourn is hearing, or [inaudible] >> this is the most power i have had in a while. [laughter] if there is no objection we will keep them record open for two weeks. hearing no objections, the

meeting is adjourned. >> thank you, mr. chairman. [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] >> c-span's congressional directory is your complete guide to the 112th congress. inside, you will find information on senators and house members, including contact information and district maps. plus information on cabinet secretaries, supreme court justices, and the nation's governors. pick up a copy for 1295 plus shipping and handling. order online at c-span.org/shop. all day saturday on "book tv" the gators blurred festival. notables include timothy noah on the haves and have-nots in the great diversions.

at 3:20 p.m. david linden on why the good stuff feels so good and the compass of pleasure. also this weekend on afterwards j. and would linger on the nobel peace prize. >> this seems not to be true. it seems that he was quite proud of his achievements in the area of explosives. they build what today we call infrastructure. sunday night at nine eastern and pacific on "book tv" every weekend on c-span 2. >> in a few moments, a senate debate and a bill about iran and a nuclear program. in an hour a hearing on ethical problems in the department of homeland security. after that, it briefing on this

week's g8 and nato summit. and later we will re-air the fcc oversight hearing. >> several live events to tell you about tomorrow. a house homeland security subcommittee looks into how the government is combating terrorist financing and that's on c-span 3 at 9:30 a.m. eastern. later, there are a couple of events here on c-span 2. including health and human services secretary kathleen civilis, speaking at the public policy institute at 11:00 a.m. some catholics have criticized the university for inviting the secretary to speak for her role in the birth control issue. at 4:30 p.m., secretary of state hillary clinton is at the council of foreign relations to talk about global food security. >> harry reid came to the floor today seeking unanimous consent

to pass an iran sanctions bill. senate republicans, however blocked the proposal, saying the bill needs to include stronger language on the willingness of the u.s. to use force to stop a nuclear weapons program. this portion of the debate is one half-hour. >> i now ask consent for the reducti act reduction act.nt which iat she'll be the amendment which isar the text of numbers 320 of the sanctions bill. as reported by the bankingich is athe committee.snd the abetment shelby red. matter be placed in the record at the appropriate place as if read. presid ere this will be placed in the record as appropriate.

>> objection.t not >> i ewould just note that this is a matter and i appreciate the majority leader's desire to bring us to conclusion. it has been worked on for for quite sometime. unfortunately, the language that has just been presented to her side has not been widely shared. i happen to have not read it yet. this was brought over at mo 10:38 a.rnm. this morning. when i came to the floor, it was wea describekd as being weaker than president obama's policy. which given the fact is as a matterenate on which democrats and republicans and the administration and the senate d w have been in close accord, in that dealing with the country of iran the and its nuclear ambitions, i would hope that we can ensure that t ihe language is agreed to by all.n there seems to be an importanto piece missing and we certainly so, need the time to talk to folks to see why that is so, whethern' it could be put backt, in or if heing thas can't. then to be able to discuss it. we certainly don't want something that is weaker than the current administration

policy. the i would hope that we could havend per some time overha the weekend and perhaps on monday when enough of the members can be comprised ofd what has been proposed here and would see if our colleagues would be willing to make a commendation that we need to have made here. >> is to president, -- mr. president, preserving the too right to object, i appreciate the leader's desire to get this done. i would like to get it done,he too. the original language was drafted in my office when i was in the other body. this mning i'v it is an issue that i have been onl involved in ay long time. this morning i had a c thance to look at it only within the last half hour.ere i suppose i could've been here issu at 10:38 a.m., but even 10:38 a.m. for an issue like as this, in my view is that it is not as strong as the president's other policy.solution on it is not as strong as any other

resolution on this policy we have ever passed. the question that would logically be asked would be whyhat we not? that is an oversight inut over the drafting, that's what i would t like to think, that we hican work this out over the weekend and make this a reflective of our national policy and the president's policy, but i would be very concerned about moving to this language and hope that we could work with the leader to as have language that we could e send t bring up as early as monday and pass and send a message to the world that the united states ou governmen senate supports the statedt policy of our government in this mo critical issue. nobody wants iran to be able to nuclear move forward and obtain nuclear as capacity. i would be very concerned about moving forward on this language ob as itje currently appears to beor stated. >> mr. president is there an hope tt we objection by senator kyl? lleagu >> mr. president, for the reasons noted i would hope that we could work with our

colleagues to fix the problem. until we do, i would have to object. >> this is such an interesting suc conversation. i didn't have the papers.having t i don't blame my friend from arizona for not having the document. i don't lay my friend fromalf- missouri for having not yethis. looked at it. the this was given to the republican in leader yesterday in midday.d now, mr. president, the languagehey w they were objecting to was in the base bill. unless they didn't read the base way of bill, they have a problem. he said they want to get it done.. pr strangely it is showing they want to get it done. mr. president, thises has been af classic examples. staf i have been patient with my staff, working with senator staff and the minority leader senator

and i have been as patient as i no. can be. is mr. president this is ha absolutely -- i am torn about what is happening here. weed have tried to get this done. every day. we try to do a little bit more. that was we have this agreement that was agreed to by all of thees parties. i'm but, of course now there is no agreement. i am deeply disappointed that my preventi republican colleagues are preventing the senate from to passing critical sanctions against iran. to do if they want to embarrass the t president, thiso is a strange wayd we to do it.ass these two months ago i came to the im senate floor and said we needed to pass the mesanctions immediately. this was duped pass they bipartisan bill sponsored by senator johnson and senator com shelby. itmi was passed unanimously.ried

we heard their objections, and we have tried mightily tog address them. the goal of getting this billour all passed and protecting all national security, and that of our allyy israel, this bill pa includes a bipartisanck packagend sponsored sponsored by senators shelby and johnson which is. important to senator you senator menendez, senator kirk, and senator johnson.orward as in a letter today we are being urged tose move forward as quickly mr as possible. i asked but that letter be madesident? part of the record. >> without objection. >> mr. president, democrats are ready to move forward and vote on an amended bill. the this amendment will put the senate on record along with

president obama, brewing out a policy of containment on iran. yes, republicans have objected again. we can't afford to do this any longer. ons may 23, there is a round of place international negotiations t taking place with the iranians. it is related, sadly, to this and resolution that we have. he needs to be done now, notore later, but now. our we cannot afford any more delays. sanctions are a f key tool to stopeatening iran from creating i a nuclear threa weapon, strikingte issue israel, of and the united states.aise i am to the end of my patience.rom i usually never raise my voice with a senator, and i apologize to my friend from arizona. i did a few minutes ago. these conversations between him and me i am really upset about

this. i feel that i have been -- jerked around. that is a pretty good can understanding of language that people have. because we can never quite getublicans there.t us the republicans have kept the just reform of this for two months. we should have done what shelby and johnson told us to. i hope that something will near happen in the near future but ient? the don't know if ipr have faith that reid: i want it will. [talking over each other] heard [talking over each other]publicande >> do i have the floor now?the presidg off >> i would say to my good friend would of the majority leader this is outrage i an outrage that i don't understand. my staff tells me that we didn't receive the drafted amendment to late last night. and this morning we were told it was final.isorning w we gote the draft late last night, this morning we were told

it was final. of t we have debates about a lot of things, but one of the things that we typically have not been unable to reach an agreement on is the iran issue. i don't know what the problem is here. a little communication ought tos be able to bring us together behind something we can speak to unanimously. the goal that we all have i think in this body, virtually, which is everybody, which is to do ev everything we can to prevent iran from becoming a nuclear armed country. there is no reason in the world reason in why we can't resolve minor differences we have and move want forward. we certainly don't want to take a step backward.ers there are members on my side of the aisle who are concerned that the way the measure is currentlyong crafted could actually be a stepirecti in the wrong direction. it could have been a drafting

error. bipartisan but what is wrong with sitting down on a bipartisan basin looking at the language and making sure we get it right. that way we can achieve the goalth that everyone in the room would like to achieve. ab nothing, i think to get angry about. a proper response would be to work out our differences and to o go forward. timeliness, if it is an issue tha we need to do it quickly. i think we all agree to that on both sides of the aisle. i would say to my friend, i don't think there is anything to be outraged about.s let's get to work, work out the differences and pass the resolution. my m >> mr. president, myin mind indicates that why is there any problem?udent loans we agree, just like with student loans we agreed.his they think this iran sanction thing is a great thing to do but we can't do it. they say we need more

commun medications. how about two months? how much more do you need? and i am not going to get into getting tom hawkins into trouble. that doesn't really matter.we hav we have tried and tried to get we c an something done and we can't get it done. mr. president, i think it is really too bad for this institution. i'm not outraged, i am upset. it has been used as a tool toadversy a try to adversely affect the president in some way. i will continue to keep an open mind on this, but i have to say that i am terribly disappointed. the iranians, there are people watching this they are laughinghing atd at us. laughing at us. u we can even come up with a a simple resolution. there is no force of law. doesave

i shouldn't say that, it does have some, but they are laughing at us.'s here is the united states senateibblin o quibbling over a sentence. a sentence that is a resolution since it was drafted. [talking over each other] >> minority leader?th >> most people work five days a week. this is 1:00 p.m. on a f thursday. 1:00 o what is the problem here? we have a bipartisan agreement i think about the approach we iran ought to take with regard to the iran sanctions issue. aisle a the leaders on my side of the aisle are anxious to be involved and working out the language, a and i would say to my friend, and he said there is a sentence change the ent -- well, a sentence can change someth the meaning ofin something. how it is crafted is nothe irrelevant.ing rather than us standing on the 1:0 floor, pointing fingers at each other, it is only one clock on a the

thursday afternoon, let's sit down and work out the differences, passed something we can agree to come and try to make a difference for ouro make country. >> no matter how many times you say it, the language that we are mr.eid: told they are complaining about -- it was in the initial bill.about wn mr. president i appreciate myhat is friend saying what is it?st peo most peoplepl would [inaudible]more tha five days na week. i work more than five days a tw week. to and i have been working the last two months trying to get thisdo done, and every time we tried to do it the first few weeks it was it was senator kirk.. i gave him every benefit of the doubt. if his staff was working with him, that's what i did with senator kirk and mr. president, trying t we haveo been trying to get this done for a long time. it is not today at 1:00 p.m.

this we have wanted to move forward on this for a long time.anothey or let's give it another day let's just give it another day or so, th we will take your care of this.att' that is not how it iss working.er: the >> i think the majority leader for yielding and i want to applaud you for asking to bring u the legislation that passed bankin unanimously out of the bankingor committee to the floor. there is no one in this chamber been who has been stronger on pursuing sanctions on iran and weapons trying to deter iran from achieving nuclear weapons, and. i on support senator lieberman'st tim resolution. but time is of the essence. we must send to the iranians a cannot clear message that you cannot just stall negotiations and have negotiations thinking that you are buying time.

we must show them that notwithstanding their intentions to buy time they are going tosanction face t consequences.ar consequences on the central bank of iran that is already moving forward and that the administration is seeking to enforce.ctions tt end of the continued, perfecting incredibl sanctions that the banking committee sends out unanimously, that is incredibly important to send the iranians a message. i look at what the legislation will do in part in essence, closes loopholes that the iranians have figured out.. so it creates sanctions on the national iranian oil company, on the national iranian tanker company, making them agents of o the iranian revolutionary guard, and then imposing sanctions on financial institutions that would facilitate transactions and entities, this is incredibly important. the ratings are using this as a

way to get around.io it has sanctions on satellitensrights companies. they impose human rights sanctions on those companies rvices that provide satellite services to the iraniane regime. prevent but they failed to prevent jamming up transmissions by others of the same satellite service company. they had sanctions on financialervices. messaging services even though the largest of them alreadys, pulled the plug on the iranians, we don't want any otherng serv messaging services to fill in the void of what swift did. to make we want to make sure the badsible. news is timely as possible. >> mr. president, can ie sure interrupt?is clear when >> i want to make sure the record is clear when i a talk about --new >> yes, yes. >> and i want to ask this question to my friend from new jersey. >> would he think the ratings are doine'gre today as they watch this performance? this.

>> they are feeling that they -- they originally felt that when we send 800 to nothing vote out of here, they said oh we are ining trouble, now they are saying to themselvesms well, they might succeed. we cannot allow the iranians to into the believe asse they head into these week t negotiationsha next week that there is anything but having our that w foot on the head of the snake. and that they are going to d continue to do that and triede every possible sanction and close every possible loophole, which is largely what the the legislation that you were seeking to pass on the floor accomplishes. thatachy is why they passed out of the banking committee. even as we talk about the resolution there is no reason to stop the very essence of what would send a message to iranianshe that would hurt them in the economy, that would undermine their ability to continue in

iran as a government, that is v going to be the very strongest set of sanctions weaken levy ano from one government toth another. we for which we are leading an increasingly multilateral effect, which is when sanctions take place the best.la i am beside myself.ourse. bu were their amendments that i impor would offer? of course. but i find it far more important to move ntaow and tuesday this incredibly strong set of sections says that we should get mess passage and the iranians get thetiationsake message, and to have those mes negotiations take place, and ihe majory appreciate the majority leader's efforts. i applaud it. i certainly am for it senator li lieberman'seb resolution. of moving the set of sanctions to ensure t ensure -- to ensure that the iranians don't do anything thato come to the table and say, we are ready to follow a course of

disarmament here, in terms of nuclear productions, is incredibly important. wait sometimes things can wait. this is not one of those times in which waiting produces the sired -- desired result on the contrary. it would produce a negative result because they will presume that we will not close every i he we loophole in being a purpose of one mind. i hope we can achieve that before we leave here. >> the majority leader. >> before my friend leaves, iend would like to direct a question to him. true, is it true i say to my friend, committee but you are a member of the banking committee? >> yes. >> industry to this resolution came from a banking committee? >> yes, the legislation did.. mr. >> they came from the r budget talk, committee that the matter about leg which we talked, iranian sanctions legislation, came from that but it was unanimous is question

that right? >> that isto correct. been >> you and your staff have been heavily involved in what is o going on during the negotiation taken place. is that fair? f >> that is correct. >> also, jessica lewis my foreign policy adviser, is itew jer true that she worked for the senator from new jersey? is that true? did >> she did until the majority leader took itde from me.. rei [laughter]d: >> and it is true that werue have thier worked over this. of time -- this period of time. minute next we are there, then we are notths? there, the next day come in the next few minutes, it is taking forever and two months, is thathe floor and right? the has >> we have thought various times an additiona that we wouldl be on the floor tor pass a common the common thanobject there has been an additional decider or objection. t i just think that what we have

before us, especially in timing are doesn't mean that we can't leg continue tois perfect as we move to the future, as we are doing in this legislation. this legislation now passed unanimously out of the committee, supported by the those major wadvocates of those who share our vision that we cannot have a nuclear power iran and thawe iran with nuclear weapons to believe that this is important to move now so that we canrani achieve this and send a message i to the iranians.y ie to i think that time is of the essence, in this case, and thatt. is why it came to the floor to mr. p support your efforts. >> the senator from connecticut. >> i think the chair. mr. president, this is a classic moment, unfortunately, too typical, where we all agree on the goal here. pass a we want to pass another tier of t sanctions against the iranians

to deter them from developing new nuclear weapons. our goal has been to get this the done before the conference and with before that the united nations council meets again with iran in baghdad, which is next tuesday. b i understand the frustration ofis te the majority leader. no one has been consistent and t steadfast as he has and sincere in their effort than the majority leader to have this body make very clear -- to everyone in the world nuc particularly, the iranians -- that we will not accept them becoming a nuclear power and we sanctions a will be prepared to use economic sanctions and if necessary orce. certainly, the threat of force. i also know the majority leader-- has been pushed and pulled backeveral w and forth over the last several

weeks to get to a point where we can get this done before may 23, so i understand it is frustrating. i understand his frustration at this moment. langu i hear my republican colleagues, i look at the language that they are concerned about. about they are concerned that in be listing the economic sanctions, as one way that can be used to stop iran from delivering thatcredible thr developing nuclear weapons and not listing the credible threat, the option of military force, asresident president obama and others have said, that we are sending a message of weakness. my original hope was that the more important thing to do is to get this done and passed the senate before next tuesday when all the parties come to baghdad. but the b difference here is note only small, it is nonexistent. we all agree that we ought to we ought try -- we ought to make them make

tough, they're not to be watered haveo down. we want them to stop their bei nuclear weapons program and we all agree that we have to have the credible threat of force being used against the iraniannctions nuclear program if there is any real hope of sanctions working. know so i hope i know the majorityhat sen leader has to leave atte 4:00 o'clock, but i wish that we could ideally agree on this and get it done today and passed by consent. if we cannot, i hope we can do it by monday. so we do send a message of unity, which we have with thecedures, t words, the proceduheres, the mood -- it is standing in the way of us sending a unified messages senate from the united states senate to world the rest of the world particularly to the islamic republic of iran and g. ron that mean we mean business.if we

so let' cs step back.. let's get it done by the weekend and adopted by monday at.- mr >> i would just like to echo senat what my friend from connecticut, senator lieberman said. i would like to get this done so we could vote for it and send tuesday the appropriate signal. if it's not so much that we act before we let the iranians in the world know what we mean when we speak. i hope they are watching us. they will probably find it odd that lindsey graham is associated with being easy ons iran. ass senator menendez has been a champion along with senator kirk of creating legislation that we can all buy intosz 100 to nothing. we can't agree 100 to nothing. what they achieved was remarkable. senator reed, you have been pulled and torn, i apphireciate i it, enjoyed working with you. t

do you think maybe somebody istion doing your own, we are not. w wou why would senator graham be ont what the floor concerned about what ely di we say if i genuinely did not believe that we were making a mistake. i don't want to embarrass the president.pr in mr. president, keep it up with iran. i hope sanctions y work. fo and if you need to use military force to protect this nation if sanctions fail, i will be yourid that need to strongest advocate but a couples' of things and that have been a said need to be corrected the manager's amendment is not what was in the base bill. the b section 102 in the base bill is three paragraphs. add the botedtom line is that this section was added in the this manager's amendment that didn't exist in the base bill. nothing in this act or amendment

made by this act shall be construed as a declaration of an war on authorization of the use of force against iran or syria. thiss n that was not in the base bill. wa where the heck did that come from? this is not a declaration of war. but when you put this senate in their and the new amendment thing doesn' at say one thing about the use of force to control iranian behavior the presence own words are all options on the table. we are now producing a producte that backs away from where the t president has been regarding all options on the table, and we and with the new managers package with a statement that authorizes the use force against iran and syria. it is all about sanctions and say the bill and the only time we authoze mention force is to say we won'tall do it. were we won't authorize it.t all i'm asking is what senator lieberman said. these sanctions are h great.

i hope they will change iranian r behavior. they haven't yet commented on think they ever will, but i'msk willing to go down this road. all i am asking is that when you the include in the legislation iranian ideas or bconcepts that will change iranian behavior, that wethe t put on the table all optionslegislatn where all options on the table in the bill. this will be the first piece of legislation where that is ominously amid and omitted.aration o this is not a declaration of syr war,ia the use of force againstll about iran and syria would make theutf iranians believe, quite frankly, we are all about sanctions and that is it. i am all for sanctions to sue if you are listening in around, iwa want one on the table to make you change your behavior. this summer, it will be tough for the world.ity.

there is nothing credible to ll cha make a believe they are notppreciate pursuing a nuclear weapons senor capability. i hope the talks next tuesday will change their behavior. i appreciate what senator menendez has done along with his giv colleagues on the bankingehan theyre committee. to give this president moret tools to make them even tougher than they are today. but the worst thing we could do before next tuesday is leave any this doubts to d anybody who is watching this debate that there is more on the table than just sanctions. that on the table and we hope to god we never use this is the ability to stop the iranian w nuclear program by the use of force, and that's all i wanted to say. and i hope we never get there.tatement and this last statement, i agreewith, th not with, i am not asking for a wil l declaration of war against iran n or syria, but i wilotl not vote for a document at this critical time in our nations history that

we have an existential threat who has from a rogue regime who has a killed over 2000 americans in iraq, who has been a proxy for whose people throughout the planet do whose own president doesn't believe the holocaust existed to my friends, i have to say if lin you think this is the righte answer, in addition to all theenate recog fine work of the banking committee, and my dear friend senator menendez, we come in the senator, recognize what the president has been saying for months. that military force is also an option. >> even though job opportunities are scarce in this economy, it's not for nothing do you have spent his time preparing. jerry falwell senior observed that you don't determine a man's greatness by his talents were well as the world does but rather by what it takes to discourage him. america needs you are talents and skills so don't accept

somebody else's construction of the way things ought to be. it's up to two of the system accountable. >> sometimes it is up to you to stand up to be right and to lobby and martin organize and vote. don't be content to sit back and watch. he met president obama and mitt romney delivered commencement addresses in the past few days come and you can watch them online anytime at the c-span video library. and over the next few weeks. but for effect on booktv. of se >> the department of homeland security and charles edwards testified on capitol hill along

with representatives from tsa, customs, border protection and immigration about homeland security ethics policies and training. this is a little more than an hour. >> the purpose of this hearing is to examine the purposesrit conduct an alleged criminal activities within the department of homeland security. i recognize myself for an opening statement. may 6 through the 12th waswe set a public recognition week. we set aside time each year to honor our public servants to keep us safe, care for our veterans come patrol our borders and find cures for bird rare diseases. they make our country stronger and a difference in the world. most of our employees understand that public service is a public trust. each one has a responsibility to the united states government and

the citizens they all servetrust. about private gain and most citizens adhere to distrust. however, the pew research centeran 3000 interviewed 3000 adults aboutf their views of ourour government. 54% said the government is feder mostly corralupt while 31% said they thought they were honest and 11% said they don't know either way.cans hasa the survey showed just one third of americans has recoverable opinion of the federal government. the lowest positive rating in 15 years. a measure of dissatisfaction is to beure expected.c our leaders promise things they can't deliver. what compounds this is government scandals.have bmany rep there have been many reports of federal employees wasting taxpayer dollars and in some cases, committing crimes, which erodes the trust american people put in our government.. the general services administration employees spentr

over $800000 on a conference in las vegas. the department of homeland security spent nearly $1 billionll returon on the secure border initiative network with little return on this investment. we have also found criminal activity within ourivity with our bureaucracies. customs and border protection prot collaborating with drugpers smugglers, cartels andonglers, ctels immigration personnel, filing fraudulent travel claims, and la tsa personnel stealing personal belongings of passengers. since 2004 130 agents of thed bor united states customs and border protection have been arrested, charged or otherwise prosecuted onse corruption charges.charg the allegations anesd convictions include alien and drug smuggling, money laundering andnspiry. conspiracy. the dhs acting inspector general, charles edwards, does atte that mexican drug cartels are in dhs attempting to corrupt dhspact ou

employees and this impacts our national security. the inspector general also the sports that since 2004, thereere ha has been a 30% in the increase of complaints against employees. it's every of 2012, nice agent pled guilty to 21 counts oftion obstruction and corruption violations. these charges include illegally obtaining and disseminating government documents to individuals with ties to drug trafficking organizations who have also been convicted of accepting thousands of dollars ofdoll of bribes eking documentation from immigrants.zzlinm o a former immigration chief is accused of embezzling stemming from a travel voucher and kickback scheme that divided the government of more than

$500,000. for other i.c.e. employees pled guilty to involvement in a scheme to defraud the government in the past year alone, there have been numerous incidents ofn te p misconduct on the part of tsa officers and employees.sh nd thousands of dollars of cash and items had been reported stolen. dozens of tsa officers were fired over improper luggage screening because they have of allowed pieces of luggage ontoer flights without proper screening.gedly tsa officers have allowedsengers passengers expedited security checks. a number of additional allegation csa range from racially charged statements and actions to inappropriate sexual a rece 22 co harassment. a recent 22 count indictment alleges tsa employees tookoy paymentsee to provide drugug r carriers unfettered access through los angelesnternti o international airport so that drugs could be smuggled into the united states. executive branch employees are subject to executive orders issued by the president andd

ethics regulations issued by the u.s. office of government ethics. some agencies also have issued supplemental ethics regulations ply to that apply to their employees. even though they have stacks of government manuals briefings about ethics, these things continue.ey are a t they not only waste taxpayer dollars, they are a threat to our nation.hrit while the majority of this h bureaucratic personal is law abiding, this hearing will examine the ethical policies and procedures of selected components of the department ofan homeland security and make an attempt to understand why these things continue and what can be done to prevent them in the one future. one final note. it isa unfortunate that the department of homeland security faces such serious ethical mishaps refuses to provide witnesses from leadership, to

discuss these matters ins an openmatter way before the american people.we req we requested the leadership from i.c.e. and cbp.portancef these is only cbp recognize the importance of these issues.t have ecogni with nat that i recognize the ranking member of. >> thank you. i want to thank you for holding today's hearing.ng the i want to thank you for holdingt this hearing and examining the department of homeland security. wor there are many employees that work everyday to protect us from di natural disasters and crime. se i would like to thank these people for their service. unfortunately, there are some among them use their position of for their own personal gain. in doing so they put the very nation they were sworn tohey were sworn protect in harms way. since october 2004 137 u.s.

customs and border protection cbp's, employees, have beenr indicted or convicted of charges.nd during fiscal years 2010 and 2011, there were at least 33sed 33 incidents of corruption wereion mission compromising and corruption at cbp. furthermore, the i.c.e. office they have had investigations and validations of misconduct at cbp and i.c.e. the number of allegations thatha that office is staggering.thii in 2012 alone, and this is onlybeen a t the month of may there haveot been a total of 101 corruption allegations involving i.c.e. employees, involving 362 from cbp.

at that tsa in 2011 there were three allegations involving corruption 33 involving security and intelligence violationsa and 210 alleged general misconducts.misc although these allegations have not t been proven, they are a the fa testament to the fact that eliminating public corruption at the department of homeland security is in dire need off improvement. therefore, i am pleased that representatives from tsa cbp and i.c.e. are justified this morning, and i look forward to hearing from them of stepson. they've taken to remedy the situation. of course, there are other incidents of corruption we can point to but what sets thee., situations of i.c.e. cbp and tsa apart, is the inherent trustd our nations relations on the border and in our nation's airports.. i am troubled by allegations within the department and disagreements on who should be in charge. recent efforts have been

implemented to improve workingking relations among dhs cbp, and the office of professional sponsi responsibility.ndum of i hope the new memorandums ofause understanding will make aternal difference. i hope that internal disputes will not undermine the efforts unfortunately, they perpetuate this kind of misconduct. again, i look forward to hearing from the witnesses and i think them for their participation in this important hearing. i yield back. >> i think the ranking member. the other members opening statements may be submitted for the record. today we have a distinguished panel of witnesses on this very important topic. first, charles k. edwards acting inspector general with the department of homeland security. he is a frequent guest here sbco before the subcommittee. he has assumed this position in

bruary february 2011. he served as deputy inspectorinspectonera general at the department of security, homeland security. he has over 20 years of experience in the federal government. nexter we have thomas winkowski, the acting deputy commissioner of u.s. customs and border ac protection. in this capacity, mr. thomas winkowski serves as chief, operator overseeing the daily o operations of 60000 employees at cbp.f he began work with the u.s.with th customs service in 1975 as a student. we thank you for your service mr. thomas winkowski. next we have mr. james duncan. he was appointed as assistantdunn administrator of tsa's office of professional responsibility in 2011. mr. duncan has more than 16 years of experience, supervising and handling employees and misconduct cases at opr and the department of justice. at my alma mater as well.

next mr. tim moynihan atment. immigration customs and enforcement. he has more than 20 yearshi c working with the government. he has been in his position since 2009 where he works withworkforce integrit workforce integrity personal screening and security i management. i want to thank all of you fort. being here today. tod with back in the chaire recognizes mr. edwards for histe testimony. goo >> thank you senator maccollcall and member keating and distinguished members of the subcommittee. thank you for inviting me to testify about his important of topic.ated ci .. vi focused on protecting the nation. while a small percentage of employees have committed criminal acts another misconduct

, dispute should not be used to draw conclusions about the character, integrity or work at except the many. over the past year, dhs employees continued to demonstrate this ethic of service from responding to 99 federally declared disasters to unprecedented efforts to secure america's borders and to advances in protecting the nation's transportation networks and critical infrastructure. but those who violate the small to be said to come even one corrupt agent or officer who allows harmful goods of people to enter the country puts the nation at risk. corruption within the ranks of dhs can have severe consequences. a corrupt dhs employee makes up to bribe for allowing what appeared to be undocumented aliens into the u.s. will unwillingly helping terrorists enter the country. likewise, taking a bribe to

allow the entry of what appears to be contraband could expose the nation to weapons of mass destruction such as comical or biological bombs. oig has made investigating corruption at top priority. but the personnel and organizational independence of oig investigators are free to carry out their work without interference by agency officials. it is essential to maintaining the public trust and not only the work of the oig, but also the dhs workforce as a whole. the oig investigate all allegations of corruption involving dhs employees, a compromise of systems related to this security of transportation networks. for example, oig received information about the cbp officer using his position at a large urban airport to support an international drug trafficking organization. oig joined an agency

investigation that by i.c.e. which led to dismantling of the drug organization and the rest including the cbp officer. at least 19 separate occasions, the cbp officer had bypassed airport security using his own badge to smuggle money in reference for this drug traffickers. in december 2010 he was convicted and sentenced to eight years in prison. in another case oig conducted an investigation into allegations involving a transportation security officer at the orlando international airport. the tsa is still limited and 80 laptop computers, cell phones and ipods, estimated $80,000 from passenger legates over a three-year period from 2008 through 2011. tsa terminated his employment in march 2011.

august 2011, the tso pled guilty to federal charges of embezzlement and collection of the investigation in general 2012 was sentenced to 24 months of probation. on may 1, 2012, the former acting director of intelligence for i.c.e. pled guilty to defrauding the government of $180,000 in a three-year scheme involving fraudulent travel vouchers and time and attendance claims. sentencing is scheduled for july july 2012. he faces a likely prison sentence of eight team to 27 months. three other ice employees on a contract employee previously pled guilty to charges related to the scheme, which cost ice more than $600,000. these examples of intolerable behavior by a very small number of employees come at each represent a threat to our nations security and the

public's perception of dhs and its mission. dhs is employees are held to the high standards professional conduct and oig is committed to aggressively pursuing those who violate dhs standards. chairman mccaul, i'd be happy to answer any questions you are the members may have. >> the chair now recognizes mr. winkowski for his testimony. >> mr. chairman, ranking member keating, it is a privilege to appear before you today to discuss u.s. customs and border protection's an ethical standards in combat, corruption and misconduct within the workforce. i would like to begin by recognizing the dedication bravery and i demonstrated by the overwhelming majority of cbp agents and officers who put their life online each day to protect our nation. as the largest uniform law enforcement agents in the country, cbp deploys over 60,000

agents, officers and mission support personnel and support of our critical mission of securing america's borders against threats while facilitating legitimate trade and travel. as they continue to see success in our efforts to secure the nation's borders from the cbp will continue to be targeted by criminal organizations and individuals that grow more desperate in their attempts to smuggle people and illegal contraband into this country. i am here to discuss the vulnerability in the practice steps we've taken to mitigate this threat. as you mentioned, mr. chairman we recognize public service is a public trust. at the center of this cbp's core values of integrity and it is that the utmost importance of all employees and all employees are guided by the highest ethical and moral principles. i'm proud the overwhelming majority of the men and women in the cbp work for service honor and integrity and while only a small fraction of the workforce have engaged in illegal or

unethical behavior since the inception of cbp. any such behavior disgraces the agency and betrays the trust of the american public. one instance of corruption within the workforce is one too many. commitment to integrity begins as soon as an employee applies for employment and continues to write a cbp employees career. we utilize multiple tools including improved applicant screening an exhaustive background investigations to ensure thorough vetting of the men and women seeking employment with cbp. since 2008, cbp has forgot it polygraph examinations online for some applicants coming critical tool used to screen applicants before placing on the front line. cbp is building the capacity to polygraph 100% of all law enforcement applicants in compliance with the mandates of the anti-border contraction act

of 2010 and is on track to achieve this goal while an advance of a january 13 deadline. in addition to preemployment prevention efforts, cbp has also strengthened capacities to detect and investigate corruption within the existing workforce of approximately 200 experienced investigators nationwide, cbp internal affairs uses behavioral science, analytical, research methods to flag indicators of workforce corruption and provided intelligence driven response. in conjunction with these we've developed the analytical management systems control officer -- office called and scout, which analyzes data in the ports of energy to verify anomalies that may create potential misconduct. cbp's office of field operations and border patrol have established integrity and ethical -- ethics committees which provides strategic recommendations to combat combat

corruption and promote integrity in the agencies distinct operational environments. these askers feed it to cdc's integrity, claiming in court nation of the eyepiece ec. the ip cc includes representatives from the enforcement examines best practices and courtney's integrity related initiatives within the agency. cbp recognizes collaboration and information sharing is a critical factor in maintaining order integrity and addressing allegations of corruption lodged against cbp employees. we've established mo used with the oig and i.c.e. authorizing the co-location of agents in order to assist in investigation of employees. for also active participants in the 22 fbi lab border corruption task force forces nationwide. mr. chairman members of the

subcommittee come integrity is central to cbp's effectiveness as guarding the nation's borders. i thank you and members of the subcommittee for the opportunity to appear to make clear our core values and strategic approach. i look forward to answering any questions you may have. >> thank you, mr. winkowski. the chair now recognizes mr. duncan. >> good morning, ranking member trent green and establish numbers of the subcommittee. it's a privilege not to appear before you today. every day 50000 tsa employees work to ensure the security of our security of our nation's vast transportation networks. tsa employees risk-based intelligence driven operations to prevent terrorist attacks and reduce the vulnerability of transportation networks to terrorism. article is to maximize security while protecting privacy and facilitating the flow of legitimate travel and commerce are multilayered system of transportation security. tsa's work for a sitcom pushes the security mission by

screening passengers and baggage of more than 450 airports in the united states. every week we've had 14 million passenger reservations in 13 million transportation workers against the terrorist watch list. a first facilitate the secure air travel for 1.8 million persons each day. success of our mission depends on the dedication and integrity of our workforce. therefore, everything we do at tsa, from hiring, promotion and training to inspections investigations and adjudications is driven by commitment to the highest ethical standards. administrator pistol has made clear that integrity professionalism and hard work are the bedrock principles for the entire tsa workforce. when a tsa employee fails to live up to our high standards, he or she violates public trust tarnishes the excellent work of the rest of our workforce and damage is tsa's reputation with the american people.

for that reason we hold all of our employees to the same high professional and ethical standards that we have zero tolerance for any kind of criminal at 230 in the workplace. tsa's office of human capital publishes the policies of the employee conduct. all employees are required to know our standards intervene to review them on an annual basis. to further assist, tsa's online training center provides training for all new first-time tsa supervisors to give them tools to identify report and prevent misconduct. when allegations are misconduct arise, they are investigated by tsa's office of inspection and independent investigative arm of the agents see that reports directly to the tsa administrator and deputy administrator. the office of inspection reviews allegations and reports them to the dhs office of inspector general and connects investigations if oig elects not to handle than themselves.

the office of inspection also proactively conducts independent oversight of inspections of operational programs, procedures and policies both in the field and at tsa headquarters. inspections check on compliance and equally important provide employees an opportunity to raise allegations of misconduct in a confidential setting. to promote consistency timeliness and accountability in the disciplinary process, tsa has created an office of professional responsibility of pr. zero pr adjudicates all allegations of misconduct involving senior level officials and enforcement personnel. zero pr officials also review each investigation involving a tsa employee with the investigation was conducted by the office of the inspector general. working with tsa's open in a unified database to allow us to track all matters throughout the agency in this will help us promote consistency on

accountability. zero pr has also created greater consistency and transparency and the entire tsa disciplinary system by creating a table of offensive and penalties. the table, available 12 tsa employees provides ranges of penalties for each type of offense and guides the decisions of officials said zero pr and in the field. as we strive to continue strengthening transportation security and improving the overall travel experience for all americans we always bear in mind the success of our mission depends on the integrity of our workforce, freedom to travel is fundamental to our american way of life and tsa is fully committed to ensuring everyone can do so securely. thank you for the opportunity to appear today. i'd be pleased to address any questions you may have. >> thank you him and mr. duncan. when we certainly appreciate your presence here today to testify, we did request a

witness at higher policy level, either administrator pistol or his deputy. i think it is important to have someone at the policy level to discuss these important issues and get tsa failed to produce a witness. next come the chair now recognizes mr. moynihan for his testimony. >> good morning, chairman mccaul, ranking member keating. thank you for the opportunity to discuss the standards for integrity and professionalism. the overwhelming majority demonstrate integrity and perform the duties upon her everyday. however as in any large organization isolated acts of misconduct from time to time. i testimony focuses on mechanisms in place to ensure robust process are investigating allegations of employee misconduct and assuring picardy. ..

comprised of three operational divisions to play a role in maintaining the highest level of ethical standards. the investigations connects criminal and administrative contact with nation to personnel co nd and 26 offices in puerto rico. f hope your field offices are investigate criminal serious administrative misconduct reportcondt. investigative results to principal offices and conductingppos field training to his employees

conducting the training to i.c.e. employees. inspections division reviews i.c.e. offices, programs come and detention facilities to comply with agency regulations, policies and applicable attention standards in order to provide executive management with an independent review of the agency's organizational health and assess the effectiveness and efficiency of the i.c.e. mission. finally the security division is responsible for the implementation of agencywide programs, including personal physical, operational, and counterintelligence. screening employees on the front end is an important step that we take to ensuring our mission. i.c.e.'s vigorous process of screening include security checks, background investigations and periodic investigations every five or 10 years. in addition, once employees are on board, we apply proactive treating measures and oversight at employees at every level, to ensure the integrity of the

i.c.e. reports. in addition to the i.c.e. training we supply the federal conflict of interest statues. the agencies are critical to the mission of enhancing employee integrity. in 2010, i.c.e. and cbp entered into a memorandum, or they are assigned to a opr. this collaboration has solidified i.c.e.'s commitment to providing cbp with complete and timely awareness and criminal information. recently cbp took 75 cases to opr involving i.c.e. employees. it the cases regarding cbp

employs were guarded internal affairs, and a pr will provide monthly status updates to doj. we are taking proactive steps to ensure that our everything is addressed in the swift manner. i speak for her after morning when i say that i.c.e.'s leadership as part of the professionalism of our workforce. thank you for the opportunity to be here before here -- before you today. >> we certainly appreciate you being here and your testimony. we requested that director morgan was someone, a deputy or policy person to appear before this committee, and unfortunately, your agency failed to produce that witness. with that, the chair recognizes himself for five minutes, for questioning. when i worked in the public integrity section in the department of justice, we served

in the ethics committee. i have always believed that the public service is a public trust. the vast majority of your employees are honest and hard-working, and unfortunately the actions of a few bad apples taint the entire organization. the purpose is not to take the overall organization at all. let's look at these specific abuses and determine how can we fix the problem. i will start with you mr. winkowski. the cbp the allegations of border patrol agents, cbp officers working with drug traffickers, to facilitate their business, it is just unconscionable. and you know the threat. you know the threat from a national security standpoint, and you know they are trying to infiltrate our organization. i want to start and ask you about your polygraphs to the polygraphs to you in conduct

with employees prior to employment. if you can elaborate on what some of your findings have been in terms of the preemployment screenings. >> yes, thank you very much, mr. chairman, for that question. as i mentioned in my oral interview, we began doing the polygraphs in 2008. we have done about 10,000 polygraphs. about 400 month. come january 2013 under the anti-port of corruption act we will do to all law enforcement officers. we will meet that mandate of 2013. a matter of fact we will meet that mandate this summer. this summer we will have 100% of our law enforcement officers undergoing a polygraphs prior to coming on board as a law enforcement officer. of those 10,000 polygraphs that we have done we have discovered a host of individuals that apply

to be border patrol agents or border protection officers, and a polygraph is able to identify individuals that had a very questionable past. let me just give you several examples mr. chairman. we had a case where between 2002 and 2009 several bundles of marijuana were smuggled by an applicant. on at least three occasions, the applicant personally unloaded duffel bags of drugs from vehicles and store them at his residence. the applicant also accepted $1000 in exchange for allowing vehicles is storing marijuana to be sorted his home. a polygraph was able to identify that. obviously, the employee was not hired for a law enforcement position. another example in march 2009

an applicant and friend became involved in transportation of cocaine and marijuana. the applicants friend profited an unknown amount for the transportation of marijuana from a key profited off of $3500 of cocaine. in some cases, i believe, they are having a sole purpose of wanting to become a border patrol officer is to infiltrate us. in a way that we have robust background processes, where we have systems that i talked about in my oral reply and data mining and looking for anomalies, we really believe that the polygraph is going to be a real game changer for us. we are ready for that. we have been doing polygraphs but come the summer everybody will undergo one. i think one of the things also that both you and the ranking

member has talked about, the national security positions. i viewed cvpos in the border patrol agents as national positions. as such, we need to take a different view of the position. for example, while you're starting a polygraph prior to the employment, and weeding out those individuals that are deceptive, data indicates that really an officer goes about 8.8 years into service. the question becomes, while we have data mining and we are doing -- we are looking for anomalies and periodic investigations every five years, i think we need to be looking at polygraphs throughout the employee's career. i think that is very very important, and we will work with the officer of personal

management. i couldn't agree more with what you said and what mr. keating said about the national security positions. >> let me say that i agree with you. it really is a national security issue. i think the cases that you discuss in terms of preemployment screening the polygraphs, demonstrates that they are trying to infiltrate our law enforcement. there are other law enforcement agencies that require postemployment polygraphs. then i talked about this yesterday, can you tell me some of the hurdles. you know, as a former public corruption prosecutor usually the corruption occurs after employment. after they have been down on the border or points of entry where they have been corrupted by organizations with high dollar amounts to infiltrate the united states with drugs and human trafficking. now, can you elaborate what will

be the challenges and hurdles to require postemployment polygraphs? >> one of the challenges that we have is working through the hiring policies that we have in the office of personnel management. i will make it very clear. we have not approached the office of personnel management on this particular issue. but we will do that. i have asked my staff to begin the process of identifying what those hurdles are. the anti-port of corruption clearly gives us the authority on the preemployment. we need to work through internally, as well as the office of personnel management as to what will take polygraphs -- as in the standpoint of the

periodic investigations, and in between those periods of time, whether it is looking at reasonable suspicion, we're looking at a drug screening type of process where randomly we do polygraphs, i think we have a lot to learn from other agencies that employ polygraphs on a more routine basis, and we are going to undertake that endeavor. >> let me just say that i would like to work with you and cbp and the ranking member would like to join me in this, in terms of changing the policy and certainly any legislation that is required to make that change. i think this is vitally important. i'll try to keep my time limited. mr. duncan, turning to tsa. allegations and indictments of tsa employees stealing personal belongings of passengers and proper luggage screening which

at we saw the latest attempt out of yemen to potentially smuggle an explosive device onto an airplane. again, a national security issue. we cannot afford to have corrupt tsa officers. so what is tsa doing to address this? >> sir there are three aspects to tsa's efforts to prevent and detect the kind of corruption that the committee is justly concerned about. the first echoes what mr. winkowski has echoed. to make sure that we are not hiring people into tsa that are going to be a problem. that would be background checks. in the last three years our background checks have disqualified more than 5600 applicants. those who were subject to criminal history checks, financial checks and other mechanisms to make sure that we are not bringing people in who have vulnerabilities. the second aspect really has to do with prevention and we have

undertaken various prevention initiatives in the weight of scenarios, such as honolulu, where we did determine that there was a large number of backs not being screened for security. some of the working groups that we have created in the wake of honolulu have focused on identifying tools that local leadership can use to prevent and detect violations of our security protocols. and i know there are some recommendations that have been come up with him or working in conjunction with the recommendation office. those recommendations are focusing on metrics and other kinds of reports that can be used by field leadership so that we can, you know identify threats before they blossom into full-blown corruption. >> my time is limited but a 22 count indictment tsa provided drug couriers unfettered access

to the lax airport so that drugs could be smuggled into the united states. that is outrageous. and really, it is unacceptable. i understand what you are trying to do -- the prescreening, as i understand it, you mentioned a tracking system that you are implementing to basically -- the systematic tracking system to look at these misconduct that you have 400 different offices out there it is not integrated into one system. i understand you're trying to develop that. when do you anticipate that that will be completed? >> i don't have it. of time, i don't have a picnic of time. tsa is working, not just on coming up with a workable single definition of security regis, but to overhaul its supporting systems so that security breaches are reported consistently that they are validated, and that headquarters gets the information from all 450 airports so they can study

it and come up with more comprehensive -- >> and what is the timeframe this will be completed? >> i will have to get back to you, sir. >> moving on onto i.c.e. they are accepting thousands of dollars in bribes to provide documentation -- they are tied to drug trafficking organizations. this is exactly the kind of thing that terrorists want to exploit. getting documentation to get into the united states and attack the american people. again, this is really unacceptable. what are you doing within i.c.e. to remedy this? >> mr. chairman, we have a vigorous plea and trent preemployment screening process and thorough background investigation to weed out those individuals on the front end prior to employment. subsequently, it also employees go through ethics and integrity training, we have an annual

integrity awareness program, which is a policy for employees to refresh rules of conduct. on the supervisors attend the i.c.e. academy, as well as law enforcement officers, they go to a much more expensive i.c.e. training. we put out the guidelines of reporting and employee misconduct. information is received from a colleague that doesn't seem right or if they have an information. we are constantly going back and educating the work force in making sure that they know what the standards of integrity are what the agency expects from them. and proper ways to report it. i discussed briefly about offices located nationwide. pummeled a sea of the information, the doj, we are working collaboratively with

them. we preferred refer back to her office and redress it as quickly as possible. >> in conclusion i looked through some of your minerals. there doesn't seem to be any overarching policy within i.c.e. there is no specific ethics policy for i.c.e. employees. it is very generic. i would ask that you maybe go back and look at that in terms of specific ethics policies that you could direct towards your employees. a lot of it is common sense. there are so many egregious examples. it is just unacceptable. overall, the majority of employees are honest and hard-working due to great people doing a great job everyday. i now recognize the ranking member. >> thank you, mr. chairman. a couple comments i would like to make first.

first of all taxpayers are spending enormous amounts of money to try and make sure that safety is ensured for their travel. american citizens are going through enormous personal intrusions themselves, going through that gate getting screened and scanned, having their belongings gone through. this is a very serious matter. and i would think, given the fact that our security and what the public puts into this, that this hearing we would at least get the people we requested from tsa and from i.c.e. to show up. that comment to me, says something about how seriously they are taking this issue. or how not seriously they are taking this issue. i want to be clear about that in the beginning. secondly, this is just an old saw that we have had. it is before my time here, as well. the 9/11 commission has made it

clear that one of the primary problems that has to be addressed is the issue of jurisdiction. and this patchwork quilt of jurisdictions conflicting with each other -- it still is with us. and it isn't every hearing that we have ended is an underlying theme. it's here again today. i have a couple of questions. last year in testimony before the senate it was said that there was more than tension and friction between cbp and dhs there is outright confrontation and unacceptable situations. that is the end of the quote. the fact that cbp and they have

to perform a function that statutorily blog about office raises grave concerns. has the inclusion of cbp employees, as required by that memorandum, and proved that cooperation at all? even though we had to do that to get there. has that improved the situation? >> thank you, senator for the question. august 11 of last year, i signed the memorandum with a commission person. i can assure you that they have taken every step to work closely in a number of my offices i have cbp agents working with us on cases jointly. there is absolutely no battle, cbp, opr and i.c.e. this is not a state dhs problem. this is a problem for the entire nation. we want to make sure that we

address each issue effectively and timely. >> just a couple of comments. i agree with mr. edwards that the m. mode you has done a good job of really laying out the path forward as mr. moynihan had indicated. cases are being transferred from the ig to i.c.e. and cbp is part of that process. i think we have come a long ways since the testimony. >> a couple of questions that came to mind, the bulk of the people that have been involved in this corruption what is their salary range? i just want to hear a generalization. howard is people -- how much are

they getting paid? >> i would say in the average base salary, when you look at a border patrol agent or a cbp officer at the gs 12 level which is about $75000 a year, then there is overtime associated with that. especially when you look at the southwest border, there are some of the highest-paid individuals in those communities. >> your office's primary port authority over the investigation for corruption and employee misconduct. within the department of homeland security. however, you have the right of first refusal as well. usually, that right has been heavily exercised. and your office has transferred hundreds of cases for cbp and i.c.e. to handle. what contributed to that? was a result of a backlog?

what contributed to the backlog if that is what led to this? >> we had 2360 open cases. we have 219 agents. clearly, the work load for each agent is more than 12 cases per agent. i have been working actively with cbp to have their agents filed to work the case is jointly. there is a 38% increase in border patrol allegation corruption in the last several years. border patrol agents have doubled. oag has not had the resources requested. i cannot keep piling up these cases. i need to act on it. this is a dhs problem that we have to address. under my supervision, i have transferred 374 cases of new subjects to i.c.e. opr the

folks who are detailed over there. i am not transferring any crco cases. 301 of those cases are cbp cases and 73 of those cases are i.c.e. cases. still, because i.c.e. opr has an average of 4.5 cases per agent clearly they are taking the resources and in some of my -- clearly we need to -- i cannot keep taking these cases a long time to close. i need to address them quickly and get resolution quickly. all of the 2360 cases, 40% are unnamed subjects. we have an analysis group but cbp also has those resources, so does i.c.e. our intention is to work jointly

on this and try to see if we can come up with some reason to investigate sheer investigation. talking to john martin and david, this is a giant effort. i am confident that the systems put in place and the initiative is going to address this problem effectively and as soon as possible. >> and it is partly resulting in your budget situation? >> absolutely. >> i want to be clear on that. with that content with that mr. chairman, i know that. >> thank you. the gentleman from new york is recognized. >> i think all of our panelists to hear our question this morning. i want to follow-up on mr. keating's last question. and ask that mr. edwards and mr. moynihan responsiveness. from fiscal year 2010 to the present, i.c.e. opr has received

26,983 allegations of employee misconduct. some involve corruption. others did not. in any event, this number is extremely high. in addition to the investigation of the matter is, i want to know does i.c.e. opr work with i.c.e. at large and cbp to incorporate lessons learned learned from these investigations were new standards and procedures? given what you just stated mr. edwards, having to deal with the budgetary constraints you know, how does this actually work out? when i.c.e. seems to have a host of their own investigations to conduct. if you add up all the allegations together, i don't even know how personnel is able to manage.

but that is for you to answer. >> yes, ma'am. that's a great question. even for opr, the complaints we received so far 12648. nonetheless, i think that even before these investigations -- this is -- there needs to be -- and all the components are doing the proactive efforts in terms of the prescreening, the preemployment screening, periodic background investigations integrity breathing and ethics briefing we do a number of those as well. also let the employees know what to look for it when there is fraud happening. when the allegations come in we go to the -- they go through the process just like i.c.e. does and [inaudible] we work jointly, not only with i.c.e. opr and the fbi and any number of partners jointly, because the aggressiveness of

how we try to do this is going to get to a resolution sooner. looking at our caseload, and what i.c.e. has presently, i think the effort they have taken on is going to address these problems quickly. >> thank you, ma'am. i would like to ask about the joint intake center. which is the central clearinghouse for the cbp to report misconduct as well as other reportable information. it is a collaborative effort and sits in the cbp office space for it cbp and i.c.e. it is a great cooperation that has existed since dhs. the numbers, those were items reported to the joint intake center. it may involve lesser degrees of misconduct or items such as lost, missing, stolen property, things that are not necessarily allegations based. the numbers could be larger than

what we need to document, but not all of those 26000 allegations are true allegations of misconduct and were in this investigation. and i can get back you as far as a specific number of what was. from our case in perspective we have about 600 cases in our inventory right now, in addition to the 374 that mr. edwards will be transferring here shortly. we are working closely with cbp internal affairs full participation will be done during this chancellor. honestly, it is a large number of cases. we have set up teams for triage. we have set up leads for the most egregious allegations that show the greatest forms of vulnerability. we will do that is collaboratively as we can as an effort. >> my question is, what happens with the employees -- who have

alleged to do something? do they remained in their post? how would they handle this, because certainly, you know we are concerned about the public and their interactions due to these individuals, who have alleged misconduct. whatever that may be. also their colleagues as well. one bad apple can spoil a bunch. how is that managed? ..

working with our partners here were going to classify another, many nonporous venetian see have cases. while you're carrying on the criminal invest tatian, we also get -- we want to get the administrative portion merkin as well because a lot of times thee use of attorney will not accept ccep as a criminal case. we want to make sure there's enough work on the administrative sense so components can take quick administrative action.th the so it's worked with the components.want to >> do you want to add anything to do, mr. trent reid?>> man, are ju >> of us is going to say that every case stands on itsth own own merits and just the rceipt merits whether it is i.c.e. management

or cbp management to see the person in that position vulnerabilities to gray. we made to put on administrative duty while it continues, re-sign them are depending on the level of evidence and seriousness of the position of the individual. it may be put on administrative leave. that would help us face that decision. >> if you'd indulge me for a moment. mr. winkowski, -- >> i would like to have a couple of issues here, a couple thoughts. i think it's very very important that these allegations be worked down quickly. we have the responsibility to exonerate people as well. i think the panelists agreed if

we have an individual is suspicion that we really need that investigation to move quickly because that individual is still on the line, if you will and is still processing people and still processing cargo. once we are notified by the investigation -- the investigators that there is an issue, we will take that person off the line. and put them on administrative duties as mr. moynihan said. once an indictment takes place in the person is put on indefinite suspension ended this way through the court systems right now we have 11 people on indefinite suspension. to the other point of your question ma'am, i think there's a good point here. we have the investigation there is a conviction. what do we do next. there are office of internal

affairs, we dissect that. we look at where the vulnerabilities are, what we need to do from the standpoint of changing policies are changing processes. so our management controls and internal controls so it doesn't happen again. it's a constant layer effect that we implemented that we think is very important from the standpoint of the very subject. >> can we associate with the ranking member's remarks in terms of seriousness of these charges and indictments and convictions, federal law enforcement bribes taken to improperly screened luggage. first of all, stealing personal belongings as people go through the screeners all the time and

scanners and yet the idea if tsa officials urged during personal property. but beyond those are the national security implications. the idea that tsa also to take a bribe to allow thousands of pieces of luggage to go through improperly screened or to allow the drug trafficking organizations to have unfettered access. this is precisely what the terrorists are looking for. i is providing fraudulent documentation. all of these cases are trying to get things through airports improper screening, improper documentation. that's exactly what they're trying to exploit. and then of course cbp is taking bribes from drug cartel organization. and given the seriousness of this i do first want to say thank you to cbp for mr. winkowski for you showing up

at the policy level but i do want to express my extreme disappointment that tsa and i.c.e. given these allegations are proven fact did not bring forth the policy level witnesses that we requested. so it sends a signal to the congress. or these officials are just trying to hide from the american people. so i am not very happy with that. you can associate myself with the ranking member with his remarks and with that the committee stands adjourned. [inaudible conversations]

>> when people are seen to have, don't take the vice presidency. right now you are the most -- you are a powerful majority. don't take the vice presidency. you don't have any power. john said power is for power curves. i can be powered in a situation. his whole life, nothing in this life previously makes a key

because that's exactly what he has done for us life.

>> national security adviser tom donilon joined at jay carney today briefing reporters on this weakens g8 and nato summit. the six customer is meeting will focus on security issues and saturdays will focus on the economy. president about a late sunday for the nato summit in chicago. this is a little less than an hour. >> that's why he will immediately introduce into the briefing over to tom donilon national security adviser. as you know come in the united states is hosting the g8 and nato summits this year. the g8 and nato can't davit chicago to give you a preview of the summits as we'd done the past with visitors to the briefing. how make some comments take your questions on related subjects and then tom will depart and i will remain to take

questions on other matters. without a qb tom donilon. >> thank you jay. appreciate the opportunity to come by. i want to take a few minutes and not give you a couple comments at the top and then a few minutes to give you perspective on the upcoming summit and the nato summit in chicago. i'll be glad to take questions. it's good to see all this afternoon. thanks for coming out. the first thing i wanted to say is that then reflect to where we've come the last three and a half years and the initial summit the president attended in 2009 saw the local economy in freefall in afghanistan has shifted to the taliban. al qaeda was entrenched in the safe haven in the american alliances had freed. today i think it is fair to say and we can discuss this in any detail you want that we've made

significant progress on each issue and the u.s. economy's current's leadership is devastated and we put in place a responsible plan to win on the war in afghanistan and this has been a top priority from the outset. the alliance has never been strong enough talk about that. over the next several days come with the aim is to build on progress and will do so in camp david in chicago in the two really -underscore embodiment of american leadership on a range of global challenges in advance and several overarching u.s. interests. making it work effectively revitalizing core alliances and advance the strategy in the war in afghanistan and as a result of engagement and bilateral, multilateral levels over the course of the administration, we think we will see real progress made. so when i talk about over going to be doing.

the first meeting will be the g8 bidding beginning friday evening at camp david. a lot of you know i like to think historically about these things and did a little research on cam david. it's always risky to do this with mark millar in the room but i'll do this anyway at the risk of being correct it immediately. first, i want to talk about why the president chose camp david for this meeting. first, the g8 meeting will be the largest gathering of the state campaign. this is the first time the first-time doping within to have heads of state at camp david. can't davit hosted over 50 different heads of state in the seven-year history is most critical meetings and there's only been two summits held at camp david. the camp david accord in 1978 were president carter hosted prime minister dakin and an orthodox and the middle east

peace summit in 2000 between israeli prime minister ehud barak and arafat hosted by president clinton. the senate has intends to be small and intimate and the president made a conscious decision to host the g8 meeting for the region. each head of state or government will have his or her own pattern and not the opportunity to meet informally in to take advantage of the grounds at camp david. the meetings themselves were occur at the dining room table and i think this is consistent with the history and purpose of the g8 meetings. this is the basic approach is below. the origins the financial officials with the major developed economies in 1975 president shah are saying that it has a state and government from these countries to release

france and they've become rather large gatherings with infrastructure and not kinds of support staff among communications. the president went to went to pull away to get back to basics in the intent, just as leaders of the developed economy from the world and able to talk about a face-to-face and intimate session of the issues facing us. so that is the undercurrent that the president's decision to have us that can't david and i want to give you little flavor of what it will be like a prayer. let me then talk about the medium itself and the objectives of the g8 meeting.